Which FPS Actually Takes Skill?

[FollowUp]

It's more of a question of practice. Skill implies a level of mastery that isn't just playing a lot. Being skillful on an instrument typically is not just repetition. Classes or instructors are involved. That's purely a subjective definition of skill though. I suppose there is a level of gaming that involves learning the tricks... I dunno, it doesn't seem the same.

 

[Anarchemitis]

In Team Fortress 2, people who are skilled with what they play as are usually different kinds of thinkers.

Scouts are very good at situational rock-paper-scissors since they can change range vs. opponent as well as the location of their engagement very quickly.

Soldiers must know how to lead, even if parenthetically because where they go dictates spearheading of teammates and movement.

Demomen are similar to Soldiers, but with different interchange of manouverability as well as having to account for some specific weapon detail such as ballistics and area trapping.

Heavies must be able to calculate movements and locations since they can't account for these things as well for themselves.

Engineers usually are highly methodical in being able to conclude the most opportune ability to assist teammates, anticipate the flow of the enemy, and defensively (or offensively) build accordingly.
And so on.

 

[murphy7801]

I don't remember the specifics. Only that you think twisting peoples words is a legitimate form of debate.

And again, I would argue that all of that is part of the skill set you need to learn to play the game. It being broken doesn't matter. There are clearly people who are very good at the game and who know exactly where to place themselves to avoid giving advantage to the other team. The fact that there are some people who are clearly better at the game than others voids your entire argument. If it was all down to base chance then no one would be noticeably better at the game. Everyone would have an even chance of winning the match.

Also what you unlock with levelling allows you to access a different style of play. Whether you think that's fair or not is irrelevant. That just adds another level of learnt play behaviour to the game. If you're a level 1 then how could you possibly be skilled at the game anyhow? You've only begun to play it. You won't know hotspots to avoid or milk ect. The levelling is just another part of the skill. And choosing to prestige taking this knowledge you've learnt and gambling on whether you can use it whilst only having basic equipment. It's not like it's a requirement.

And static spawning is the worst imaginable thing to put in an FPS. It encourages spawn camping. Which to be honest is a complete deal breaker for me.

KZ 3 has a good spawning system. It does have static spawns, but there are various tactical spawn points scattered about the map and you have to capture them with a certain loadout. (taction)

So although you have static spawns, you can choose a different one if one of them is being camped.

That's the best spawning system I've ever come across. Because yes, random spawning isn't good. Because it's just luck as to whether you spawn in an enemies line of sight or at the complete opposite end of the map. But average static spawning just encourages spawn campers. And as far as I'm concerned, that completely breaks a game for me.

Look. The end of it is that each multiplayer game takes a certain amount of learnt skill, if you must call it that. Whether the game is broken or not is completely irrelevant. The people who are good at the game either learn the best tactics or abuse flaws in the game itself. I don't like people doing that, but they've still had to learn and practice that behaviour. It's just as 'skillfull' as squading it out in another FPS.

And I don't even particularly like cod. I especially didn't enjoy MW2. I thought it was broken as hell. But I still know that people who play it spent time and effort to instinctively know where to place themselves, or what perk set to use.

Please tell me how you can master something which is RANDOM. Bottom line is you cannot, otherwise it wouldn't be random would it? Being random means it cannot be predicted, ergo it cannot be mastered.
Of course there will be people who burst fire and aim better than others, but that is very generic and as I said, with random spawn points, that skill is still negated as you are shot many a time in the back while unable to predict when that would be.
I don't think anyone here would argue that seeing through walls and being invisible to UAV's is anything other than beneficial. All they serve to do is make the game easier, not change the style of play. Going with a shotgun instead of a sniper rifle changes the users style of play - seeing through walls etc is simply a straight forward advantage. This makes the game unbalanced, nullifying skill and it means a grinder has the advantage over a skilled gamer due to his load out. I cannot fathom how you think fairness is irrelevant. Tell me, are the Olympics fair? Is Wimbledon fair? Are the Ashes fair? Of course they are because if something is not fair, it makes skill pointless, therefore MW2 is a game that does not require or encourage skill, but grinding.
How is levelling part of skill? Levelling is merely grinding... You do not have to perform well to level, making your claim simply wrong.
No one was talking about static spawning....But agreed, it is outdated and has been done better in many a different game.

MW2 requires no skill as your loadout can allow you to have a massive advantage over the opponent, and that loadout was achieved simply with grinding. Yes you have to be able to pull a trigger, but that is so simply a monkey could be trained to do it.
If a game is fair or not is a huge element to skill - why else are all international sports competitions fair?

Actually professional sports people have to stick strict rules when comes to equipment to make it a fair competition on international events. Actually since load outs are equipment basically you just made you own point invalid. Also your understanding of the world random is flawed nothing random it only appears so. Random actually means inability to process and link series of actions that had effect on each other so they appear random even though there not. Basically humans can sometime start to see pattens even subconsciously and can sometime partially understand the actions. So in regards to sub-conscience understanding and reacting since not actually understanding directly so still appears random to higher level thought process yet a actions made due random actions have a non random response. In real life there's an example of this that fire fighters duck when fires blow back before they happen with releasing it till after the moment.

 

[Sentox6]

Counter-Strike, Quake 3, Halo CE (yes).

 

[Giantpanda602]

Medal of Honor was actually hard to play online at first, especially for my CoD playing bro (I play Battlefield BC2 mostly). Its not really "hard" its just you do so easily and are in such a tiny space.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

well there are varied different kinds of skills

for FPS GAMES

twitch shooters (which my elitist friend claims are the best of all games out there):

unreal tournament

quake

for long term know how and whatnot on shooting steadily

TF2 and Halo

now those are just fps's, if we were to include other types of shooters those would change in a heartbeat.

COD is more runny spray and pray rather than actual skill, fun, but its more spray+pray than anything else.

 

[Johnny Impact]

There is twitch reflex and there is skill. IMHO, twitch games can suck it.

This is my experience with Counterstrike: Leave the safe room at round start, get shot in the head by someone I don't see. Wait for round to finish. Start new round, leave safe room, get shot in head. Rinse and repeat. I'm not even exaggerating. Had similar experiences in other twitch games. There's something to be said for learning to use grenades but I think you get my drift here.

Team Fortress and Left 4 Dead are all about skill and teamwork. There is nothing so sublime as the (admittedly rare) tooth-and-nail battle between two teams who are both coordinated and skilled at playing their classes. When everyone is doing the right thing the battles get positively epic. You can always tell who's a team and who isn't, because the team always wins. Even if folks who only play for themselves have good twitch reflexes, a smart, focused team will go through them like a runaway steamroller. That's the kind of game I like.

 

[Enkidu88]

Bad Company 2:

I wouldn't say it requires skill on an individual level. Its mechanics operate similar to MW2/Blops, and you can rack up kills pretty easily. The true challenge is learning how to work with your squad, and whats cool is that you don't necessarily even need to talk with them. If they're going assault, go with a medic that revive them while they supply you with ammo. If theyre defending a fixed position, take a sniper and spot enemies for them. Its all great fun to me at least!

 

[RelexCryo]

I think Call of Duty takes some skill. Playing a game of hardcore free for all with 15 really good players can be hell sometimes.

I guess what I'm getting at is all FPS games take skill. It's the same kind of skill too, so I think if someone is very naturally good at Call of Duty, they will be good at Counter Strike and New Vegas and anything in between. Granted they might have trouble with the slower pacing, but I think they'd still be above average with it.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/columns/experienced-points/8066-Experienced-Points-Before-There-Was-Halo

There is a difference between skill based on precision and skill based on timing. Just saying.

 

[Firetaffer]

Every single one requires skill.

Unreal Tournament or any other fast paced variant would probably have the highest skill ceiling though.

 

[ROTMASTER]

HALO 3
and gears 1

 

[murphy7801]

Actually professional sports people have to stick strict rules when comes to equipment to make it a fair competition on international events. Actually since load outs are equipment basically you just made you own point invalid.

Way to miss the point and make a strawman.
The equipment is very similar e.g. 4.5 mm calibre air rifle with a maximum weight of 5.5 kg - the bloody stat bars show you that this is not the case with the guns in MW2. And how is it fair to give one person a heart beat sensor and the other person not? Oh wait, it isn't. Now let's look at the red dot in MoH. Improves accuracy, but decreases range from the iron sights, meaning that the standard layout has advantages. This is not true in MW2.

No the point is in this case there servers are totally hacked that it rewards cheating. Also read my earlier post stating that even practice is a factor-able aspect.

 

[Alexnader]

I think there's a difference between knowledge and skill that people aren't taking into account. I'd count knowledge as knowing what to do and skill is what it takes to execute it. So an engineer can "know" where to put his sentry nest etc in TF2 however does not need a lot of skill to execute construction. Whereas a sniper may know the best spots to camp and know which targets are a high priority but still needs skill to execute the shots necessary to be successful.

Of course engineers require skill as well but not to do their main job of building things.

 

[Caligulove]

I don't think everyone even has a common definition for what 'skill' even means. When it comes to multiplayer games, I don't consider 'skill' to be anything like reflex, hand-eye coordination or even problem-solving skills- especially when it comes to online FPS games, I think it really comes down to your skill at learning the game, the system, and then exploiting or taking advantage of the system to suit your needs, aka the people that are accused of 'hacking' all the time.

To that degree, any game needs 'skill' of some sort to be good at, especially something competitive like scoring, achievements or leveling in things like Call of Duty, Battlefield or even CS. Most people are just obsessed with K ratios.

So in a lot of ways, I think that the so-called dumbing down of some FPS games, to make them easier is really just making it harder on the people that can exploit and learn the system, it brings a greater challenge and anything without challenge is just boring.

 

[Proyoginator]

TEAM FORTRESS 2!!!
that game is so perfectly balanced only someone with true skill could get ahead.
Call of duty gives you too little health, so it comes down to a reaction time/connection test (sometimes) still fun though.

 

[SteewpidZombie]

Americas Army: Realistic to the point that several shots kill, there is usually no respawns till end of round. You have to do actual training to qualify to play as a Medic, Sniper, or Heavy weapons soldier. Plus it has things such as your gun jamming, and your character actually taking time to attach/detach silencers, aswell as the slow reload of rifle mounted grenades.

Warrock: Game is unrealistic, but playing a sniper takes skill. Bullets have a weight and trajectory/velocity. The further a enemy, the higher you need to aim. Moving enemies you need to aim ahead of them, and if VERY far away, bullets may take several seconds to hit. (Also, the maps are INSANELY huge if playing the big ones).

Call Of Duty 4: Out of the last few released, no.4 was the most skillful. Movement speed was slowed down to a more realistic amount compared to the others, perks weren't overpowered or numerous compared to the others, and killsteak spamming wasn't as much a trouble or game changer as the newer games. I personally found myself able to move slowly and carefully to tactically eliminate enemies in 1 vs 3 engagements where good aim and cover would help. (Instead of just spraying and rushing).

 

[wfpdk]

halo.

 

[Blazingdragoon04]

My vote is for MAG. You can't just go running in and wipe out an entire team, you need to actually communicate well, help out your allies, and if you are squad/platoon leader then you need to give orders and know when to use your special abilities when you really need to.

Its a shame all the skilled players play for one god damn team though... kinda imbalances the game.

 

[Yostbeef]

No game requires any formal skill,competitive gaming is joke to me.Of course if Joe Gamer has played a game for a hundred hours he's gonna be more familiar with the game than I am so of course he's gonna have the edge until I waste just as much time playing as he has.Common sense and basic reasoning skills are all that's required to play a game and if you have nothing better to do than play TF2 for four thousand hours you better be good at it.

 

[Sikachu]

And how can you compare that to someone who knows all the killspots in CS:S and where to attack first?

I don't mean to be rude, particularly since I agree with the general point that you're making, but if you think that the skill in CS comes from knowing the "killspots and where to attack first" you really aren't scratching the surface of complexity in that game. But I suspect you're just making a good argument poorly, and it is difficult to explain to someone who doesn't play the game how much processing and consideration goes into every (and I do mean every) action, so it isn't your fault.